A family whose home could be demolished because it is 75-centimetres too tall may have to fork out £200,000 for a replacement roof.

Asif Naseem is facing the whopping repair bill after councillors threw out two retrospective planning applications for his new-build Lightwood home.

It comes after planners complained that there are dormer windows in the eaves and the roof ridge is too high.

Now Stoke-on-Trent City Council's planning committee has given Asif a three-month stay of execution to allow talks to continue over the property's fate.

The Lightwood property at the centre of the planning row (Image: Stoke Sentinel)

The father-of-five has already spent more than £500,000 on the building project since plans for the Sandwell Place development were approved in 2016. He brought a petition to today's planning meeting which urged the council not to order the demolition of the house. The family moved in two months ago.

Read More

Speaking on behalf of the family, brother Shazad Hussein said: "If they take the roof off it's going to cost £200,000. But we have spent all the money on the house. There is nothing else now - where do we find £200,000?

"There are seven people there who will have nowhere else to go. They sold their other house to fund the new one.

Sandwell Place, Lightwood (Image: Stoke Sentinel)

"If they take the building down by 2.5ft it isn't going to make any visual difference. If you take 2.5ft off how are you going to see that from ground level?

Read More

"The council came in July when the roof wasn't on and said it was OK. We said to them if you think it's not right we'll stop the work."

The newly built house in Sandwell Place, Lightwood

The council received 31 objections to the retrospective planning applications and seven letters in support. Council planners recommended taking enforcement action which would lead to the house being knocked down.

Asif's representative, Rob Pattinson told the meeting: "We consider that the action considered by the council's officers is excessive. It is not reasonable, proportionate or in the public interest to take such draconian action to require the property to be demolished."

Relative Shazad Hussein

Read More

Vice-chairman Andy Platt said: “It is wrong that this house has been built in the circumstances but what is a proportionate response? Knocking down a whole house that someone is living in is a little over the top."

But Councillor Janine Bridges said: "This will set a precedent. It will allow developers to go out there, build what they like and say 'I would like retrospective planning permission'. I can't support this planning application."